780 Ti BF4 @ 5760x1080 - How many FPS to expect?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
S

Som3one

Honorable
Jun 13, 2013
719
0
11,160
Hey there,

I'll spare you the boring details and just get to the question.
Is anyone playing BF4 with a single GTX 780 Ti at 5760x1080 and could tell me How far you have to turn down graphic settings to get around 60 FPS?
All the reviews and benchmarks only Show the FPS at max. settings. (Usually around 30fps at that resolution.)
 
Sort by date Sort by votes


5960x1080_zps05ffcfc5.png
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
Woah, that is an impressive amount of answers in such a short time. Thanks guys!

Now that I am back on a keyboard (was mobile when I posted the first one) I think I need to give some more information and background/history.

Originally I have had a single GTX 780.
Then I switched to three 1080 displays for which a single 780 wasn´t strong enough of course.
Then I got a second 780 only to realize that two 780s would be strong enough but 3GB of VRAM is not enough for BF4 at that resolution, so I returned the second 780.
Since I don´t really want to pay 2000 bucks for two Titans, a pair of 290/x was the next logical step. So, I got myself a single 290x recently which is just a nightmare. So, no more AMD for me in the near future.
So, I thought about getting a single 780 Ti instead of two 780s with the thought in mind that this would be sweet spot between VRAM limit and horsepower.

 
Upvote 0 Downvote

That was very helpful. Thanks.

Just a quick question: How can the 7990 get thos results? Wouldn´t it be bottlenecked by the 3GB VRAM, too?

 
Upvote 0 Downvote
1) Why did you think 3GB wasn't enough for gaming at 5760x1080?

Most games I've seen work fine. You don't just TRIPLE the requirement for a single monitor. It doesn't work like that. All that matters is BENCHMARKS. If they don't show a bottleneck with "only" 3GB per GPU then there isn't one.

As for BF4, that's a little tricker but if you properly tweak your settings you can achieve 60FPS at almost the highest settings. As said, it can be AA and AF that can really drive up the VRAM requirements. So tweak like THIS (I'm totally making these numbers up):
a) Settings to HIGH/ULTRA (VSYNC OFF for now)
b) if you see 45FPS... turn 8xAA to 4xAA, and 16xAF to 8xAF
c) 60FPS!!

2) SLI works better than Crossfire.

3) Your original 2xGTX780 plan was probably ideal.

4) Personally, I'd rather game on a single, 27" 2560x1440 monitor that supports G-Sync. Not telling you to switch, just that a single GTX780 plus that monitor is the best experience IMO. A lot of it's personal though as I can't stand the bezel gap.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BF4 and SLI update:
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2013/11/27/battlefield-4-performance-analysis/5

*Just so it's clear, in SLI each GPU reads/writes to it's own set of VRAM. The output just ALTERNATES (Frame#1 from GPU#1, Frame#2 from GPU#2...).

If we assume at least 80% scaling (probably better but so many patches..) then you can simply take the GTX780 benchmark and multiply the score by 1.8x.

For example:
At 5760x1080, the HIGH PRESET gives you 38FPS average (24FPS LOW). So 2xGTX780's at 80% scaling give about 68FPS.

So there's no problems with VRAM amount provided you don't crank everything to the absolute max, but then that's always been true of PC gaming. There's a balance.

MANTLE:
Mantle is interesting, but selling your current card and spending $1000 or so to get AMD cards just to support Mantle seems like a waste of money to me.

For one thing, you can get over 60FPS with 2xGTX780 on HIGH. Plus, this is really just one game anyway. Keep in mind SLI is better on average than Crossfire for all the other games you play.

Mantle is also just been released for BF4 so it's hard to predict exactly what benefit you'd get. It seems to be more about getting rid of the CPU bottleneck currently. Again though, how much MONEY are you willing to spend to get ULTRA at 60FPS when HIGH plus a few higher tweaks can maintain 60FPS?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Lots of text. lol
But thanks for that. And sorry if my reply won´t be as long. 😉

Like I said, BF4 with two 780s was hitting the VRAM limit for me. Especially on the very stressful maps with 64 players.
I couldn´t do any real fine tuning back then because I was running out of my return time but I would still hit the VRAM wall with 2xAA and HBAO and everything else to ultra.

I know it´s only one game but that is the game I play 90% of the time, so it´s kinda important to me. Wel, relatively spoken.
I wouldn´t have to pay 1000bucks to switch over to AMD. I would have paid around 700 to 800€ for two 290x, minus lets say around 300€ for my current 780. Makes around 400 too 500€.

But now I will get nowhere near AMD again in the near future.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
@ the comments for 7990 having 6gb vram, only 3gb is usable as its a dual gpu card running in crosfire on a single board, and each gpu must have its own individual copy of vram, it is not shared between gpu's. each gpu renders an alternate frame individually, you get the speed benefit by combining the output of each alternate frame rendered. 3gb vram should still be anough for triple display without AA on. even if you do go over the vram of your card, faster system ram will help significantly as vram overflows into system ram when it runs out. gpu processing power for all that data over 3 screens is as much of a bottleneck than the memory. I couldnt understand how 2 3gb 780's would have been enough. Maybe
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


Uhhh, no. Just no. Why do people still think that vram compounds when doing SLI/xFire?

3gb of vram per GPU != 6gb vram available. It is still just 3gb of vram.
Without going into details too much, think of it as the GPU's are taking turns. They don't each run half of the screen. GPU1 renders frame 1, GPU2 frame 2, GPU1 frame 3, and so on.

If they split the screen in half THEN you could add vram in SLI/xfire. This isn't the case, so you can't.
Make sense?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
OP is wrong, even BF4 will not max out the Vram at the 3 screen resolution he is talking about. There is a difference between used vram and allocated vram. I know for a fact that 3 gigs is enough..........a pair of 780 ti's with 3 gigs at that resolution outperforms a pair of titans with 6gigs handily on direct comparisons.........64 player multiplayer or not.

The OP was without question better off with a apir of 780's originally. But stupid does as stupid does. 😉
 
Upvote 1 Downvote

Well, I was monitoring the VRAM usage while playing. And it would the maximum on stressful maps, then the FPS would drop significantly for some seconds.
I have seen a couple of reviews/benchmarks that confirm this.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


And that's due to being cpu bound, not due to vram. A pair of 780's will make the CPU the limiting factor, not the vram.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
And what CPU are you running? Anything less than a i7 4770k and you WILL BE CPU BOUND with a pair of 780's in SLI on MP BF4. And even with a 4770k the bottleneck is STILL the CPU before the vram.

One of the biggest misconceptions around is vram need and actual usage. Actual usage and allocation are 2 different things. And I don't know of any monitoring program that accurately differentiates between the 2.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom